Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />RESOURCE <br />STRATEGIES <br />CORPORATION <br /> <br />14001 RIDGEDALE DRIVE <br />SUITE 300 <br />MINNETONKA, MN <br />55305 <br />612/513,9548 <br />FAX 612/513,9549 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />EXHIBIT <br /> <br />:: <br />:is <br />j A <br /> <br />February 17,2000 <br /> <br />Mr. Tim Prinsen <br />Bradley Real Estate <br />2100 No. Snelling Ave, <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br /> <br />RE: City ofRoseville Lot Coverage Restrictions <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Prinsen: <br /> <br />This letter follows my review of the city's recent SC District zoning text <br />amendments and our general conversation regarding the city's lot coverage <br />limitations, As you are aware, the city's recent amendments generally reflect <br />the moratorium study recommendations regarding 24-hour uses, The net effect <br />of the amendments is to restrict certain late night activities near residential uses <br />in the SC District and to require additional buffering, <br /> <br />In addition to long standing and recent setback and screening performance <br />standards within SC Districts, the city has also had other standards in place, <br />which regulate the intensity of retail development. Roseville uses two such <br />standards: "floor area ratio" (the relationship of gross building floor area to net <br />buildable land area) and "lot coverage" (the per cent of the lot which may be <br />occupied by a building), <br /> <br />The city allows a floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 in the B-1 through B-4 retail <br />districts. This is a very reasonable standard for retail uses to meet. The <br />standard in the SC District is 0.5 or one-half of the density allowed in the other <br />districts. While the SC standard is twice as restrictive as the other retail <br />districts, it appears to be a workable standard, particularly with single story <br />development. <br /> <br />The city's lot coverage or building coverage limitation applies only to the SC <br />District. This provision limits the building footprint in any SC District to a <br />maximum of 25% of the total lot area, This is a very restrictive standard. In <br />fact, it is the most restrictive standard we encountered in our review of other <br />community ordinances. <br /> <br />There are a number issues which warrant the city's close consideration with <br />regard to this particular ordinance provision: <br />